World Cup Day 4: Your Running Commentary

The World Cup continues into it’s fourth day on Sunday and if it’s anything like the previous three, we’re in for plenty of goals and drama.

The day’s action begins at noon as a young Switzerland side takes on an Ecuador hoping to defend their home continent. Swiss winger Xherdan Shaqiri and Ecuadorian winger Jefferson Montero are two players to watch as these two nations open their World Cup campaigns.

Up second on Sunday is France vs. Honduras, with a completely rebuilt France starting lineup taking on the battle-tested Catrachos at 3:00 p.m. Paul Pogba, Raphael Varane, and Antoine Griezmann have led a youth revolution but France will have to prove they can play without Franck Ribery in the team.

Finally, the day’s action ends at 6:00 p.m. in the Maracana in Rio de Janeiro as Argentina face Bosnia and Herzegovina, who are in their first ever World Cup finals. Lionel Messi and Sergio Aguero taking on Edin Dzeko and Vedad Ibisevic means there should be plenty of goals on the menu for tonight’s match.

If you will be watching today’s matches, please feel free to share your thoughts, opinions and some play-by-play in the comments section below.

In an age of Escherian tactical schemes, it is refreshing to watch a side that plays a 1-2-3 Go formation. Only one direction on the compass:north. Only one speed in the gearbox: overdrive. Go for it Ecuador.

But does that settle it, Chris? This is very confusing to me, and this one and also the Mexico goal that was called back on the corner were called back for what seems the same reason.

Here, when ball is played, goalscorer is onside, that’s clear from replays. If the AR is then calling offside for the deflection off the defender as you say, then it appears the right call. That’s what it seems FIFA says to do.

The problem is, does the deflection count as a “reset” of some sort to the play. If so, goalscorer is indeed offside (at moment of deflection.) But if it’s part of the original play, which began when the ball was initially played to the goalscorer (when he was onside), then the goal should count.

A player’s offside-onside position is determined at the time the ball is played by a teammate.

In the Mexico case, the AR mistakenly though that the ball had deflected from a MEX head. Had it, Dos Santos would have been offside. Since it didn’t, you consider the last time the ball was played by a MEX player, which was a CK, and you can’t be offside from a CK.

In the SUI case, the when the ball was last played by the SUI by A1, A2 (scorer) was in onside position. A3 dummied, but did not play the ball. This should not have caused the AR to reconsider A2’s postiion (which was now Offside position). The AR did reconsider at that point, and mistakenly called A2 offside when he gained an advantage from the deflection off of D1.

Basically, while the “gaining an advantage” clause of the offside offense was present, the offside position was not. Hard call though…

On the offside call in the second half. It is the correct call, just as the the second called back goal against Mexico. An attacking player in an offside position can not gain an advantage on an incidental touch by a defender. This has been in effect for at least 8 years. It is unfortunate that the experts on TV are unaware of this interpretation and have not explained. Only Steve Nicol on ESPN FC has correctly discussed this on TV.

It’s hard to tell from that video, but at :40 it looks like he may have had a head offside when the ball was played. Or not, and he moved into offside position by the time the AR turned his head and looked at him.

yeah, video isn’t great. most of this is from memory. but he looks onside to me. the other CB seems to be keeping him on when the pass is made. then Gooch appears to “clear/deflect” the ball but it goes into the path of the other player. some said it was a bad back pass and therefore not offsides. US fans at the time argued it was just a deflection/clearance and that Gooch can’t be punished for that incidental touch.

That’s clearly a deflection. My only question on it is the onside-offside position. It’s very close, and I suspect the deflection caused the AR to look at the CAN player a little late (and thus after he had drifted into offside position).

Wrong. The point in time at which a players offside position is determined is when the ball is last played BY A TEAMMATE. The decision/clarification you are referring to applies to a situation where the attacking player (A1) is in offside position when a ball is played by a teammate (A2) and the ball deflects from a defending player (D1) to A1.

That doesn’t apply in this case because when A2 played the ball, A1 was in onside position. A3 dummied the ball, but crucially, did not play it, meaning that you don’t reconsider A1’s onside-offside position. The AR thought A3 did play the ball, so he mistakenly considered A1’s position at that time. A1 was in offside position at that time, and got the the ball off a deflection from B1, so the AR judged A1 offside.

He was wrong because he didn’t recognize/see the dummy and so he assumed that the ball had been played again by the SUI.

It is the position of the attacking player at the moment the defender is actively playing the ball, as he is initiating a new play. The only time this does not not apply is if the defender intentionally plays the ball in that direction. This all stems from passive offside rulings and being able to not gain advantage from an offside position, either for the defender or attacker

Matt: Please don’t take this the wrong way, but I know that you don’t know what you’re talking about when it comes to Law 11 because you refer to defenders gaining advantage from being in an offside position. That concept makes no sense because of the conditions that are required to be in an offside position, namely, that a player must be in the opponent’s half.

I think your confusion is stems from the nature of the offside offense vs offside position. Everyone knows what it takes to be in offside position: opponent’s half, ahead of the ball, behind the second to last D. The offside offense, however, requries offside position when the ball was last played by a teammate and one of interfering with play, interfering with an opponent, or gaining an advantage.

In this case, it is not offside because the player in question was not in offside position when the ball was last gained by a teammate. It doesn’t matter that he gained an advantage from his position, because his position was onside. The deflection from the opponent does not change that.

Yes, perhaps it’s programmed with the lists of money-making and non-money-making sides, such that it would not have declared that a goal if the same thing had taken place on the other end of the field…

Theres gotta be something in the water in Brazil causing all these goals and Since it seems goals with be the narrative of the tournament the US better not play the same conservative counter attack non sense tomorrow

Argentina does not exactly look like a side that can challenge to win this tournament, the way things are going so far here. They need some sort of live wire or spark, maybe like Lavezzi usually provides…

guys Argentina is winning. there are a few more games left to play. they’ll turn it on when its necessary. not need worry. i understand everyone wants the big 4-5 teams to score 5 goals a game, but it must be understood that 1 game doesn’t make a tournament…. by the way all of a sudden sabella has changed the tactics for this game….why ? I don’t know.,, we’ve played the last 4-5 yrs w/ 3 forwards, yet not today…..we’ll see.

Don’t think anybody said this was a crucial game for them. They just don’t look like a very together or threatening side so far here, especially for one often mentioned as a candidate to win the whole thing.

And yes, they’re winning — don’t think anyone is confused on that point, either — but they’re winning by the slimmest of margins, and only because of a lucky (for them) own goal.

Even though it looks like an easy group on paper, Argentina have to be more alert. Can’t give away soft goals like that to let them back in the game. Though, I expect them to pick it up , especially once Messi gets going.